PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

T J Whelan

Publications and source records attributed to T J Whelan.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Clinical outcomes of ethnic minority women in MA.17: a trial of letrozole after 5 years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors are widely employed in the adjuvant treatment of early stage breast cancer. The impact of aromatase inhibitors has not been established in ethnic minority women. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of letrozole on minority women in MA.17, a placebo-controlled trial of letrozole following 5 years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer. Retrospective comparison of disease-free survival (DFS), side effects, and mean changes in quality of life (QOL) scores from baseline between Caucasian and minority women was performed. RESULTS: Minority (n = 352) and Caucasian (n = 4708) women were analyzed. There was no difference between these groups in DFS (91.6% versus 92.4% respectively for 4 year DFS). Letrozole, compared with placebo, significantly improved DFS for Caucasians (HR = 0.55; P < 0.0001) but not for minorities (HR = 1.39; P = 0.53). Among women who received letrozole, minorities had a significantly lower incidence of hot flashes (49% versus 58%; P = 0.02), fatigue (29% versus 39%; P = 0.005), and arthritis (2% versus 7%; P = 0.006) compared with Caucasians. Mean change in QOL scores for minority women who received letrozole demonstrated improved mental health at the 6-month assessment (P = 0.02) and less bodily pain at the 12-month assessment (P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Letrozole improved DFS in Caucasians but a definite benefit in minority women has not yet been demonstrated. Minority women tolerated letrozole better than Caucasians in terms of toxicity. These results need confirmation in other trials of aromatase inhibitors.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

The difference between study recommendations, stated policy, and actual practice in a clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: We determined whether physicians involved in a clinical trial adhere to the study recommendations or the stated policy of their treatment centre with respect to the administration of boost radiation after breast conserving surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Boost radiation treatment policy was determined by survey at 25 oncology centres involved in a randomised trial of breast or breast plus nodal radiation in Canada. Actual practice was compared with stated policy and study recommendations. RESULTS: Among 248 subjects, 201 (81%) were treated according to stated policy [kappa=0.40, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.27-0.52; P<0.0001], indicating only a fair to moderate agreement between stated and actual practice, while 232 (94%) were treated according to study recommendations (kappa=0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.77; P<0.0001), indicating moderate to near substantial agreement between study recommendations and actual practice (P=0.88 for z-test of difference). In a multivariate analysis, subjects who had invasive disease at a resection margin were more likely to get a boost than those with margins clear of invasive tumour by 2 mm [odds ratio (OR) 49, 95% CI 7.6-322; P<0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians appear compliant with study recommendations for a non-randomised manoeuvre in a clinical trial, possibly at the expense of compliance with stated local policy. Clinical trial protocols should incorporate standard practice.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Postmastectomy radiotherapy: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

OBJECTIVE: To determine indications for the use of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) for patients with invasive breast cancer with involved axillary lymph nodes or locally advanced disease who receive systemic therapy. These guidelines are intended for use in the care of patients outside of clinical trials. POTENTIAL INTERVENTION: The benefits and risks of PMRT in such patients, as well as subgroups of these patients, were considered. The details of the PMRT technique were also evaluated. OUTCOMES: The outcomes considered included freedom from local-regional recurrence, survival (disease-free and overall), and long-term toxicity. EVIDENCE: An expert multidisciplinary panel reviewed pertinent information from the published literature through July 2000; certain investigators were contacted for more recent and, in some cases, unpublished information. A computerized search was performed of MEDLINE data; directed searches based on the bibliographies of primary articles were also performed. VALUES: Levels of evidence and guideline grades were assigned by the Panel using standard criteria. A "recommendation" was made when level I or II evidence was available and there was consensus as to its meaning. A "suggestion" was made based on level III, IV, or V evidence and there was consensus as to its meaning. Areas of clinical importance were pointed out where guidelines could not be formulated due to insufficient evidence or lack of consensus. RECOMMENDATIONS: The recommendations, suggestions, and expert opinions of the Panel are described in this article. VALIDATION: Seven outside reviewers, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Health Services Research Committee members, and the ASCO Board of Directors reviewed this document.

Axilla↗
PubMed2000

Cancer care workers in Ontario: prevalence of burnout, job stress and job satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: Cancer Care Ontario's Systemic Therapy Task Force recently reviewed the medical oncology system in the province. There has been growing concern about anecdotal reports of burnout, high levels of stress and staff leaving or decreasing their work hours. However, no research has systematically determined whether there is evidence to support or refute these reports. To this end, a confidential survey was undertaken. METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to all 1016 personnel of the major providers of medical oncology services in Ontario. The questionnaire consisted of the Maslach Burnout Inventory, the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, a questionnaire to determine job satisfaction and stress, and questions to obtain demographic characteristics and to measure the staff's consideration of alternative work situations. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 70.9% (681 of 961 eligible subjects): by group it was 63.3% (131/207) for physicians, 80.9% (314/388) for allied health professionals and 64.5% (236/366) for support staff. The prevalence of emotional exhaustion were significantly higher among the physicians (53.3%) than among the allied health professionals (37.1%) and the support staff (30.5%) (p < or = 0.003); the same was true for feelings of depersonalization (22.1% v. 4.3% and 5.5% respectively) (p < or = 0.003). Feelings of low personal accomplishment were significantly higher among physicians (48.4%) and allied health professionals (54.0%) than among support staff (31.4%) (p < or = 0.002). About one-third of the respondents in each group reported that they have considered leaving for a job outside the cancer care system. Significantly more physicians (42.6%) than allied health professionals (7.6%) or support staff (4.5%) stated that they have considered leaving for a job outside the province. INTERPRETATION: The findings support the concern that medical oncology personnel are experiencing burnout and high levels of stress and that large numbers are considering leaving or decreasing their work hours. This is an important finding for the cancer care system, where highly trained and experienced health care workers are already in short supply.

Burnout, Professional↗
PubMed2000

The effects of radiation therapy on quality of life of women with breast carcinoma: results of a randomized trial. Ontario Clinical Oncology Group.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of breast irradiation on quality of life, including cosmetic outcome, for patients enrolled in a clinical trial. METHODS: Between 1984 and 1989, a randomized trial was conducted in Ontario, Canada, in which women with lymph node negative breast carcinoma who had undergone lumpectomy and axillary lymph node dissection were randomized to either breast irradiation or no further treatment. A modified version of the Breast Cancer Chemotherapy Questionnaire (BCQ) was administered to women at baseline, 1 month (4 weeks), and 2 months (8 weeks) after randomization. Irritation of the skin of the breast, breast pain, and appearance of the breast to the patient were also assessed every 3 months for the first 2 years of the study. RESULTS: Of 837 patients, 416 were randomly allocated to radiation therapy and 421 to no further treatment. The mean change in quality of life from baseline to 2 months was -0.05 for the radiation group and +0.30 for the control group. The difference between groups was statistically significant (P = 0.0001). Longer term radiation therapy increased the proportion of patients who were troubled by irritation of the skin of the breast and breast pain. Radiation therapy did not increase the proportion of patients at 2 years who were troubled by the appearance of the treated breast; 4.8% in irradiated and nonirradiated patients (P = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Breast irradiation therapy had an effect on quality of life during treatment. After treatment, irradiated patients reported increased breast symptoms compared with controls. However, no difference was detected between groups at 2 years in the rates of skin irritation, breast pain, and being upset by the appearance of the breast.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2000

Direct identification and quantitation of prednisone in the presence of overlapping hydrocortisone by liquid chromatography with electrospray and atmospheric-pressure chemical-ionisation mass spectrometry.

The paper describes the application of liquid chromatography interfaced to a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer utilising the multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. The technique was shown to provide detection limits lower than 0.01% for the analysis of prednisone in the presence of hydrocortisone. Prednisone was mixed in concentrations from 0.500 to 0.0005 ppm (corresponding to 1% to 0.001% of the hydrocortisone concentration). These solutions were assayed using MRM observing the product ion transitions of 359.2-->147.1 and 359.2-->171.2 and was shown to be capable of detecting co-eluting impurities at concentrations of less than 0.001% of the major component. The assay of prednisone was shown to be linear over the range 0.500-0.0005 ppm with a correlation coefficient of 0.999 and a precision of 6.9% at the concentration of 0.005 ppm. The analysis was carried out using both atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) and electrospray ionisation (ESI) as an interface. However, for these compounds APCI provided significantly more sensitive data compared to ESI.

Atmospheric Pressure↗
PubMed2000

Does locoregional radiation therapy improve survival in breast cancer? A meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Recent randomized trials in women with node-positive breast cancer who received systemic treatment report that locoregional radiation therapy improves survival. Previous trials failed to detect a difference in survival that results from its use. A systematic review of randomized trials that examine the effectiveness of locoregional radiation therapy in patients treated by definitive surgery and adjuvant systemic therapy was conducted. METHODS: Randomized trials published between 1967 and 1999 were identified through MEDLINE database, CancerLit database, and reference lists of relevant articles. Relevant data was abstracted. The results of randomized trials were pooled using meta-analyses to estimate the effect of treatment on any recurrence, locoregional recurrence, and mortality. RESULTS: Eighteen trials that involved a total of 6,367 patients were identified. Most trials included both pre- and postmenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer treated with modified radical mastectomy. The type of systemic therapy received, sites irradiated, techniques used, and doses of radiation delivered varied between trials. Data on toxicity were infrequently reported. Radiation was shown to reduce the risk of any recurrence (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.83), local recurrence (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.34), and mortality (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.94). CONCLUSION: Locoregional radiation after surgery in patients treated with systemic therapy reduced mortality. Several questions remain on how these results should be translated into current-day clinical practice.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1999

Offering a choice between two adjuvant chemotherapy regimens: a pilot study to develop a decision aid for women with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to develop a decision aid which would encourage and assist patients to become involved in treatment decision making, and help clinicians to objectively educate patients about the benefits and risks of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. A secondary objective was to investigate the factors influencing this treatment decision-making process for women when choosing between adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (AC) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy. METHODS: An educational visual instrument called a Decision Board was developed consisting of written and graphical material. The Decision Board displays general information about chemotherapy and detailed information about each chemotherapy regimen, including the schedule and side effects, and was presented to patients with a scripted standardized oral explanation. The instrument was evaluated in 46 premenopausal women newly diagnosed with node-positive breast cancer. Following presentation of the board, the patients were given a take home version to review and asked to return 1-2 weeks later with a decision. During the second visit each patient was asked to complete a questionnaire regarding demographics, learning and comprehension, treatment preference, and factors influencing their decision. RESULTS: Recall of information was acceptable (> or = 80%). The Decision Board was found helpful by all, but the level of difficulty with decision making was variable. Out of 46 women, 23 women chose AC, 21 chose CMF, and two chose no treatment. The major factors affecting treatment preference were related to the impact on quality of life, the length of therapy, and the side effects, in particular, vomiting and alopecia. CONCLUSIONS: The Decision Board appears to be a valuable educational tool that enables patients to become well-informed and directly involved in their treatment decisions.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Evaluation of a patient file folder to improve the dissemination of written information materials for cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Many cancer centers make available to patients written information material to supplement verbal information provided by clinicians. Randomized trials have demonstrated that providing such information can increase patient knowledge and satisfaction. However, little data are available regarding effective means of dissemination of such materials. The purpose of this study was to determine whether providing patients with a personal file folder after their first clinic appointment would improve the dissemination of written information materials and increase patient satisfaction. METHODS: A before/after study was performed. Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed cancer attending the Hamilton Regional Cancer Centre were selected randomly and interviewed by telephone within 1-2 weeks of the first clinic appointment regarding the number of information pamphlets received, patient satisfaction, and general preference for written information materials. The preintervention evaluation (T1) occurred over a 4-month period followed by the introduction of the personal file folder into the clinical practice. Six weeks after its introduction, the postintervention (T2) evaluation took place over the ensuing 4 months. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients completed the evaluation (150 each in T1 and T2). Responding patients in the two time periods were comparable with respect to background demographic variables. The mean number of information pamphlets received by patients increased with the introduction of the personal file folder from 2.4+/-2.0 standard deviations (SD) in T1 to 3.6+/-2.5 SD in T2 (P=0.0001). The percentage of patients planned for treatment who received treatment-related information increased from 36% (42 of 116 patients) in T1 to 65% (68 of 105 patients) in T2 (P=0.002). Mean patient satisfaction increased from 3.3+/-1.1 SD to 3.8+/-1.0 SD over the 2 time periods (P=0.0001). The majority of patients (87%) believed it was important to receive written information materials. CONCLUSIONS: The patient file folder increased the dissemination of written information materials and currently is being incorporated into routine practice.

Attitude↗
PubMed1997

The supportive care needs of newly diagnosed cancer patients attending a regional cancer center.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the physical and emotional health status, self-perceived problems, and needs of newly diagnosed cancer patients to determine and plan supportive care strategies. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of newly diagnosed cancer patients attending a regional cancer center during a 6-month period was performed. Patients with breast, colorectal, head and neck, lung, and prostate carcinoma as well as nonmelanoma of the skin were selected randomly. Patients were interviewed prior to their first appointment at the clinic. Physical health status was assessed using the Symptom Distress Scale, psychologic health status was assessed with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), day-to-day functioning with the Rapid Disability Scale, and social support with the modified Sarason's Social Support Scale. Perceived needs were assessed in a number of ways, including identification of patients' specific social concerns and informational needs, and by asking them to list their current problems or concerns. RESULTS: Of 156 eligible patients, 134 completed the interview. One hundred and twenty-nine patients (96%) reported current symptoms that included fatigue (66%), worried outlook (61%), difficulty sleeping (48%), and pain (42%). Forty-four patients (33%) were identified as psychologically distressed with a GHQ score of > or = 6. One hundred and fourteen patients (85%) had informational needs, 89 (66%) indicated > or = 1 social concerns, and 55 (41%) reported a need for assistance with day-to-day living. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with newly diagnosed cancer commonly report symptoms related to fatigue, pain, and psychologic distress. Other frequently reported issues relate to the need for information and social concerns regarding the patients' ability to take care of their home and maintain family and other relationships. Awareness of these issues is important for planning supportive care interventions for newly diagnosed cancer patients.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Surgical management of early stage invasive breast cancer (stage I and II). Provincial Breast Disease Site Group.

GUIDELINE QUESTION: What is the optimal surgical management of early stage invasive breast cancer (stage I and II)? More specifically, what is the relative efficacy (and safety) of breast conservation therapy (lumpectomy with axillary dissection) compared with modified radical mastectomy? OBJECTIVE: To make recommendations about surgical management and techniques in the treatment of early stage invasive breast disease (stage I and II). OUTCOMES: Survival, local recurrence (for lumpectomy patients) and quality of life are the primary outcomes of interest. PERSPECTIVE (VALUES): Evidence was selected and reviewed by 6 members of the Ontario Cancer Treatment Practice Guidelines Initiative, Disease Site Group for Breast Cancer (Breast DSG). Earlier drafts of this evidence-based recommendation have been reviewed, discussed and approved by the Breast DSG, which comprises surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, epidemiologists, a pathologist and a medical sociologist. There was no consumer participation in the development of this guideline. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: There are 7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing breast conservation therapy with mastectomy in women with early stage breast cancer. BENEFITS: In 6 RCTs, no statistically significant differences were detected in survival rate between the mastectomy and conservative therapy (lumpectomy) groups. In 1 RCT, a statistically significant differences was detected in favour of the mastectomy arm; however, this was an early trial with substantial methodologic weaknesses. HARMS: None. PRACTICE GUIDELINE: Women with early stage invasive breast cancer (stage I and II) who are candidates for breast conservation therapy (see discussion of technical factors) should be offered the choice of either breast conservation therapy (excision of tumour with clear margins and axillary dissection) or modified radical mastectomy. The choice is an individual one for the patient, and thus she should be fully informed of the options, including the risks and benefits of each procedure. She should be informed that breast irradiation is part of the procedure for breast conservation therapy. In addition, she should be aware of the potential need for further surgery if the margins are positive. For further information about the use of radiotherapy in the management of early stage breast cancer, please refer to the Ontario Cancer Treatment Practice Guidelines Initiative's practice guideline Breast Irradiation in Women with Early Stage Invasive Breast Cancer Following Breast Conserving Surgery.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1997

Breast irradiation in women with early stage invasive breast cancer following breast conservation surgery. Provincial Breast Disease Site Group.

GUIDELINE QUESTIONS: 1) Should breast irradiation be given to women with early stage invasive breast cancer (stage I and II) following breast conservation surgery (lumpectomy with clear resection margins and axillary dissection)? 2) Is there an optimal schedule for breast irradiation? 3) What is a reasonable interval between definitive surgery and the start of breast irradiation? 4) Are there patients who can be spared breast irradiation after lumpectomy? OBJECTIVE: To make recommendations about the use of breast irradiation in women with early stage invasive breast cancer following breast conservation surgery. OUTCOMES: Local control is the primary endpoint of interest. Survival, quality of life (addressed through the adverse effects of radiotherapy) and cosmesis are also considered. PERSPECTIVE (VALUES): Evidence was selected and reviewed by 6 members of the Breast Disease Site Group (Breast DSG) of the Ontario Cancer Treatment Practice Guidelines Initiative. Earlier drafts of the evidence-based recommendation were reviewed, discussed and approved by the Breast DSG, which comprises medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgeons, epidemiologists, pathologists and a medical sociologist. There was no participation by a community representative in the development of this guideline. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: There are 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 meta-analysis comparing breast irradiation with no breast irradiation following breast conservation surgery; 6 randomized trials comparing breast conservation surgery plus breast irradiation with mastectomy are also included, as well as several retrospective studies. BENEFITS: All of the 5 RCTs showed a significant decrease in local recurrence rates among patients receiving radiotherapy. In the 4 trials with a median follow-up of 5 years or longer, the relative risk reduction with breast irradiation ranged from 69% to 88%. The absolute differences ranged from 16% (p < 0.001) to 25% (p < 0.001). Despite the effect on local recurrence, no difference in survival was detected in any of the 5 trials. Most of the patients with local recurrence in these trials underwent mastectomy. HARMS: Major adverse effects of breast irradiation occur very infrequently. PRACTICE GUIDELINE: Women with early stage invasive breast cancer (stage I and II) who have undergone breast conservation surgery should be offered postoperative breast irradiation. The optimal fractionation schedule for breast irradiation has not been established, and the role of boost irradiation is unclear. Outside of a clinical trial, 2 commonly used fractionation schedules are suggested: 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the whole breast, or 40 Gy in 16 fractions to the whole breast with a local boost to the primary site of 12.5 Gy in 5 fractions. Shorter schedules (e.g., 40 or 44 Gy in 16 fractions) have also been used routinely in some centres. The enrollment of patients in ongoing clinical trials is encouraged. Women who have undergone breast conservation surgery should receive local breast irradiation as soon as possible after wound healing. A safe interval between surgery and the start of radiotherapy is unknown, but it is reasonable to start breast irradiation within 12 weeks after definitive surgery. For women who are candidates for chemotherapy, the optimal sequencing of chemotherapy and breast irradiation is unknown. It is reasonable to start radiotherapy after the completion of chemotherapy, or concurrently if anthracycline-containing regimens are not used. For further information, please refer to Ontario Cancer Treatment Practice Guidelines Initiative's practice guideline "Surgical Management of Early Stage Invasive Breast Cancer (stage I and II)."

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1996

Patients' preferences for therapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: development, testing, and application of a bedside decision instrument.

The objective of this study was to determine a patient's preference for treatment in the poor prognostic situation of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. A standardized method of information transfer was developed and pretested for feasibility, acceptability, comprehension, interobserver reliability, and validity. The Decision Board (DB) describes to the patient who has completed surgery for suboptimally debulked ovarian cancer two treatment options, their potential side effects, and possible outcomes. The psychometric properties of the DB were determined in 37 volunteers without cancer and 11 women following first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. The Board was then administered to 12 patients with stage IIIc and IV ovarian cancer at the point of deciding future chemotherapy. The feasibility of presenting poor prognostic information, patient comprehension in an emotionally charged situation, and her treatment choice were determined. Observation of patient-physician interviews revealed that survival information is not usually discussed on the initial consultation. Using the DB, it was feasible to provide survival information to 98% of the healthy women. Comprehension was high, with 96% of the questions being correctly answered. Interobserver reliability was high (kappa = 1.00). The construct that hypothesized that understanding information is a determinant of choice was verified, as 95.2% of women had predictable shifts in expressed preference. The strength of preference in healthy women was statistically significantly higher for Plan B (paclitaxel-cisplatin) than for Plan A (cisplatin-cyclophosphamide) (P < 0.001). The method of presenting survival information (median survival versus percentage survival at 3.5 years) influenced choice (P < 0.04). At the point of decision making, 33% of patients with advanced ovarian cancer chose Plan A and 67% chose Plan B. All volunteers and patients stated that they wanted to be fully informed of the choices of therapy for their disease and to be involved in treatment decisions. The DB is a reliable and valid method for sharing information about advanced ovarian cancer with patients. At the point of deciding first-line chemotherapy in this poor prognostic situation, patients still value survival more highly than the quality of life during chemotherapy.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

A randomised trial of two information packages distributed to new cancer patients before their initial appointment at a regional cancer centre.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to which a new patient information package (NPIP) or a mini version of the same package (mini-NPIP) reduces emotional distress and meets the informational needs of patients arriving at a tertiary cancer centre for the first time. A comprehensive package, NPIP, consisting of procedural information regarding cancer centre location, description of the health care team, treatment services, research, educational activities, accommodation and community services provided at the centre; and a condensed version of the same package, mini-NPIP, were developed. Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed breast, gynaecological, lung and prostate cancer, referred to the centre for the first time were prerandomised to receive NPIP, mini-NPIP or no information package. Patients randomised to NPIP or mini-NPIP were mailed the information package at least one week before their first appointment. On arrival at the centre, patients were administered the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) which measures psychological distress, and interviewed regarding preferences for information and acceptability of the information packages. Of 465 randomised patients, 161 were excluded post-randomisation and 304 completed the entire interview: 100 were randomised to the NPIP, 102 to the mini-NPIP and 102 to the control group. Emotional distress as measured by the BSI was similar for all groups (P = 0.98). Most patients preferred to receive the information (98%), receive it before the first appointment (84%) and by mail (79%). These preferences were more evident for those given the information packages. The majority of patients found the information packages easy to understand (88%) and useful (89%), and no differences were detected between packages. The cost of production and dissemination of NPIP was more than double the cost for mini-NPIP: $ 8.93 vs $ 3.98 (Canadian dollars) per patient. For patients presenting to a cancer centre for the first time, packages of procedural information do not appear to reduce psychological distress, but are preferred by patients. Given the cost of producing NPIP, mini-NPIP is the preferred approach.

Feasibility Studies↗
PubMed1995

Breast irradiation postlumpectomy: development and evaluation of a decision instrument.

PURPOSE: To develop an instrument to help clinicians inform patients about the benefits and risks of breast irradiation following lumpectomy and to help an informed patient decide whether she prefers this treatment. METHODS: A Decision Board consisting of written material and visual aids was developed. It provides the patient with detailed information about her choices (breast irradiation or not), outcomes (breast recurrence and survival), probability of those outcomes, and quality of life associated with treatment and outcome. We studied the decision-making process in 82 consecutive node-negative lumpectomy patients who were seen in consultation by a radiation oncologist and oncology nurse. The Decision Board was used in the last 30 patients in the cohort. RESULTS: Patient comprehension following the consultation without the Decision Board was greater than 65% for all questions addressed, except for poor understanding of the lack of survival benefit associated with breast irradiation (12% of patients answered correctly) and that it could not be repeated (15% of patients answered correctly). Comprehension following the consultation with the Decision Board was similar, but understanding regarding the repetition of radiation (83%) was improved. Only 70% of patients in the no-Decision Board group felt they were offered a choice. This was increased to 97% in the Decision-Board group. Overall, 95% of patients chose breast irradiation, and this did not differ between groups. Patients reported several reasons for choosing breast irradiation, all of equal importance. CONCLUSION: The Decision Board facilitated shared decision making in node-negative lumpectomy patients who chose breast irradiation, but it did not affect a patient's choice to select breast irradiation.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed1993

Surgical management of cecal diverticulitis.

Ninety surgical cases of cecal diverticulitis at the University of Hawaii hospitals were reviewed from 1980 to 1991. Seventy-eight percent of the study group were of Asian descent, with a mean age of 41.7 years. Right lower quadrant pain and tenderness were the only constant findings, occurring in 86 and 87 of the 90 patients, respectively. The most common preoperative diagnosis was acute appendicitis, occurring in 73% of patients. A right colectomy or cecectomy was performed in 49 patients, an appendectomy in 29, and a diverticulectomy in 10. Seventeen complications occurred, only 1 of which was in the appendectomy group. Follow-up of up to 10 years was successful in 27 of 29 appendectomy patients, only 4 of whom had recurrent pain. There were no instances of a missed cecal carcinoma. We concluded that in those patients in whom carcinoma can be ruled out and in whom there is no evidence of abscess formation, appendectomy combined with postoperative antibiotics is a safe and effective method for the treatment of cecal diverticulitis.

Adolescent↗